How we rate

Gamble Atlas does not invent scores. Every number on this site is arithmetic performed on figures other people published, and this page describes the arithmetic completely enough that you could reproduce it yourself.

The formula

For each casino we record the rating currently published by each of these platforms: AskGamblers, Casino Guru, Trustpilot, Casinomeister, LCB, Bitcoin.com Games. Each figure is stored with a link to the exact page it came from and the date we read it.

Platforms use different scales. Trustpilot and LCB publish out of five; the others out of ten. Every figure is rebased onto ten by doubling the five-point ones. The score we display is the plain, unweighted mean of those rebased numbers, rounded to one decimal place.

No platform counts for more than any other. We considered weighting — a case can be made that a site resolving player complaints deserves more say than one aggregating star ratings — and rejected it, because any weighting we chose would be our opinion dressed up as a calculation. A plain mean is the one operation nobody has to take on trust.

A casino found on fewer than 2 platforms is shown as unrated — averaging a single figure produces something that looks like a rating and is not one. 2 is a lower floor than we started with. Newer casinos are often not yet reviewed by every platform we track, and holding them to a stricter minimum meant most of them sat unrated indefinitely with no path to a score. Two independent figures is still a real average of two different platforms' opinions, not one platform's opinion dressed up as a consensus.

What is not in the score

Commission is not in the score. Gamble Atlas earns money when readers sign up through our links, and the ranking order is a direct function of the aggregated figures — there is no manual placement, no paid position, and no tie-break we control.

Our own editorial opinion is also not in the score. The written verdict on each casino page is ours; the number is not. When we think a casino is worse than its aggregate suggests, we say so in the text and leave the arithmetic alone.

Where this method is weak

Three limitations are worth stating plainly rather than hiding.

It inherits other people's blind spots. If every platform we read rates a casino generously, so do we. The aggregate reduces the effect of one platform's bias; it cannot detect a bias they share.

Metrics are not identical. Casino Guru publishes a Safety Index, which weighs complaint history and terms rather than player enjoyment. Trustpilot aggregates customer sentiment. Averaging them treats different questions as one, which is a real compromise. We label every metric by its actual name in the source table so you can see what went into the mean and discount it if you disagree.

It is a snapshot. Every figure carries the date it was checked. We re-verify the leading casinos monthly and update the date only when we have actually looked again — a refreshed timestamp on unchanged data would be the easiest lie on this site to tell and the least excusable.

Corrections

If a figure here does not match what the source currently shows, tell us and we will check it. Getting a number wrong is the only failure that matters on a site whose whole claim is that the numbers are checkable.